London: Protesters Attack Royals

by leavingwt 14 Replies latest social current

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Camilla hit by rioter through car window as protesters attack royals

    The Duchess of Cornwall was physically attacked through an open car window as thugs rampaged in London , the Standard can reveal today.

    A rioter managed to push a stick into the royal limousine and jab her in the ribs. Camilla's terrifying ordeal came as a baying mob surrounded her and husband Prince Charles when they rode through central London in the vintage Rolls-Royce last night.

    A police source said one of the car's rear windows was opened in error as tuition fee protesters moved in.

    The attack is the biggest royal security breach in decades and raises new questions about protection of the couple. Charlie Gilmour, the son of Pink Floyd guitarist David, was with protesters in Regent Street when the car was hit.

    The Standard can now reveal the security breach was even more serious than first believed, with thugs managing to reach deep into the car's
    interior.

    Armed officers were seconds from drawing their guns but the police driver managed to accelerate away from trouble.

    Police sources have revealed that the Duchess was “very scared” when the yob leaned into the car. He said: “She is laughing about it now but everyone was rather shaken.”

    . . .

    http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23905622-student-protest-mob-attacks-charles-and-camilla-on-fees-riot.do

  • james_woods
    james_woods

    God forbid that these "students" should actually have to pay their college tuition.

    However, I personally would not have driven my Rolls Royce into that mob just to see a stage play.

    They did make a mess of it with the paint bomb.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    End game.

    Socialism works only until you run out of other people’s money.

    Advice from an English rock band:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tuGYJZ5_Is

    BTS

  • nelly136
    nelly136

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/theroyalfamily/8193138/Royal-car-attack-Charles-and-Camillas-terrifying-ordeal.html

    One witness described how the Prince had wound down his window to try to distract the protesters by waving as he tried to protect his wife. ...

    ...

    The Prince, wearing a dinner jacket, raised the window again after a police outrider shouted: “Sir, put the window up.” Moments later the window shattered after being hit by another missile, said by one witness to have been a brick.

    silly sod.

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Britain to probe lapse in royal security after riot

    British police promised an investigation on Friday after Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, was caught up in London's worst riots in years as student protests over a rise in fees boiled over.

    Thousands of students, furious at government plans to raise the cap on tuition fees almost threefold, fought running battles with police throughout the center of the capital on Thursday.

    At one point the protesters surrounded a limousine carrying Prince Charles, Queen Elizabeth's oldest son and heir, and his wife Camilla, kicking the doors, cracking a window and throwing white paint on the car. The couple escaped unhurt.

    The London Evening Standard newspaper reported that a protester managed to push a stick through an open window and jab Camilla in the ribs. Protesters could be heard shouting "Off with their heads!" in a shaky filmed recording of the incident.

    Prime Minister David Cameron condemned the violence and said he was concerned about the lapse in royal security.

    London police chief Paul Stephenson would investigate the riot and the incident, Cameron said, promising the "full force of the law" would come down on offenders.

    "There were quite a lot of people who were hell bent on violence ... The crowd behaved sometimes in an absolutely feral way. I think people see that as completely unacceptable, violent thuggish behavior," Cameron said.

    The clashes were the worst political violence in London since a mass riot in 1990 over a local tax which helped to end Conservative leader Margaret Thatcher's decade in power.

    . . .

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101210/ts_nm/us_britain_politics

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    He shoved a stick up where? In camilla's what? Bet, she never had it up there, before.

    S

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Why Brits Finally Started Freaking Out About Government Cuts

    In the photograph that appeared the following day, her mouth was open, her eyes were wide, and she seemed to be shouting as her car window shattered. But those who know her insist that the Duchess of Cornwall—Camilla Parker Bowles, wife of Prince Charles—was not frightened by the demonstrators who attacked her car during a demonstration-turned-riot in London late last week: She was angry.

    She wasn't alone, either. Three demonstrations—ostensibly protests against a rise in university tuition—have turned violent in London over the last month. During the first, thugs wearing black ski masks broke into the headquarters of the Conservative Party, smashed windows, and threw fire extinguishers at the police. During the most recent—on the day of the tuition bill vote—they drew graffiti on a statue of Churchill and urinated on its base, damaged the Christmas tree in Trafalgar Square, and then attacked the royal car. One protester—the adopted son of Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour, as it happens—climbed the Cenotaph, London's central war memorial (inscribed "To the Glorious Dead"), swung from a flag that hangs from the top, and then tried to start a bonfire outside a courthouse for good measure. Imagine a masked mob raging through the grounds of the Washington Monument, spray-painting the Jefferson Memorial, and trashing Arlington Cemetery, and you'll understand why Camilla—like many others—was unsympathetic.

    Still, this kind of violence demands some explanation, particularly because the British public's initial reaction to government spending cuts was, as I wrote in October, stoic acceptance. Unlike the French, who spent most of that same month on strike, the promise of a new age of austerity seemed to appeal to many in Britain, particularly those old enough to feel nostalgia for the penny-pinching, consumer-unfriendly country of their youth.

    Clearly, not everybody feels that nostalgia: Charlie Gilmour, age 21, doesn't remember postwar rationing, and he has probably never eaten corned beef hash from a can. The privately educated son of a multimillionaire, he will never worry about tuition fees and won't have to scrimp and save to pay his mortgage in London's (still) ludicrously expensive housing market. But I'm sure he is surrounded at Cambridge by many people who will. David Willetts, a Conservative politician who is now the minister in charge of higher education, recently published a book whose title, The Pinch: How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children's Future and Why They Should Give It Back, pretty much sums up the problem facing Gilmour's friends, if not Gilmour himself. Britain's 20-year housing boom has benefited people who are now in their 50s and 60s—the same group of people who once enjoyed free university tuition at the taxpayers' expense, who anticipate large pensions on their imminent retirement, and who are now solemnly instructing their children that it's time to cut back, "for the benefit of future generations." Never mind that the hated tuition bill is accompanied by provisions designed to help the poorest, or that British students will pay only a portion of the real cost of education, which taxpayers still subsidize. Just because a generational struggle takes place within the middle class doesn't make it any less ugly.

    If anything, the British protesters—especially the ones wearing black balaclavas and swinging on flags—resemble not striking French transport workers but the anarchist students who were burning down shops and banks in Athens two years ago. Like their Greek brethren, the British left has, at the moment, no organized political outlet. The opposition Labour Party is befuddled by defeat and is anyway held responsible for the current economic crisis. Its former leader, Tony Blair, was responsible for imposing tuition fees in the first place, and its current leaders have equivocated about whether to remove them. The Liberal Democrats have stuck by the coalition and voted to raise tuition. The Conservatives clearly aren't going to appeal to people who piss on Churchill's statue.

    All of which seems to leave angry young people with nothing left to do except throw another post-ideological tantrum—a strategy of dubious merit. In the end, Central London was trashed last week, but the bill passed. Tuition will go up. The coalition dug in its heels. And I'm sure Charles and Camilla, along with other angry old people, learned their lesson: Next time, take another route to the theater.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2277756/

  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Britain is now more Thatcherite than when Margaret Thatcher was in power, with people much less supportive of the welfare state and the redistribution of wealth than in the 1980s, according to an authoritative study of the country's mood.

    New Labour oversaw the biggest recorded shift to the right in public attitudes on those measures, despite a surge in concern about the scale of the wealth gap between rich and poor.

    Sympathy towards benefit claimants has evaporated, along with support for redistributive tax and spend policies, over the past 20 years, with Labour governing during a period of significant hardening of attitudes towards the poor, the annual results of the British Social Attitudes survey reveal.

    But public satisfaction with health and education improved dramatically over the same period, the study shows, leaving the researchers asking why Labour did not fight the election on its social policy record – and warning that the coalition is now risking a significant backlash against its reforms and cuts to public services that people are happy with.

    . . .

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/dec/13/social-survey-thatcherite-britain

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    I am of mixed feelings about the cost of higher education.

    I have a Bacheor's in Business and Mechanical Eng and I paid for Both myself with a combination of full time work and part-time education (towards the end) and full time education and part-time work ( in the beginning).

    Yet I think that post secondary education should be free for all the qualify for it, truly.

    I think that a 60 or 70% is too low for that and that it should be 85% and up and that trade schools and such should be a more viable option for those seeking higher education but with lower grades.

    I think that the more educated and well trained a generation is, the better.

    I also think that schools should make it clear that a trade like welding and carpentry and such as just as useful ( if not more so) for society and just as prestigious as economics, computer progamming and medicine.

    Lawyers of course should be controled via whip and cat n nine tails !!

  • nelly136
    nelly136

    everyone knew there would be cuts and times would be hard,

    but i think the main issue of contention lies with Nick Clegg who ran round the universities making promises and making a huge deal out of signing a pledge he had no intention of honouring.

    the students were probably a bit idealistic to realise that any politician whose lips are moving is lying his arse off, and in return the libs cornered the university student votes.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/12/lib-dems-tuition-fees-clegg

    A month before Clegg pledged in April to scrap the "dead weight of debt", a secret team of key Lib Dems made clear that, in the event of a hung parliament, the party would not waste political capital defending its manifesto pledge to abolish university tuition fees within six years. In a document marked "confidential" and dated 16 March, the head of the secret pre-election coalition negotiating team, Danny Alexander, wrote: "On tuition fees we should seek agreement on part-time students and leave the rest. We will have clear yellow water with the other [parties] on raising the tuition fee cap, so let us not cause ourselves more headaches."

    The document is likely to fuel criticism among Lib Dem backbenchers and in the National Union of Students that the party courted the university vote in the full knowledge that its pledge would have to be abandoned as the party sought to achieve a foot in government. Within a month of the secret document, Clegg recorded a YouTube video for the annual NUS conference on 13 April in which he pledged to abolish fees within six years.

    "You've got people leaving university with this dead weight of debt, around £24,000, round their neck," the future deputy PM said in the video.

    Clegg also joined all other Lib Dem MPs in signing an NUS pledge to "vote against any increase in fees". The leaked document showed that during the preparations for a hung parliament the Lib Dems still intended to fulfil that commitment.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit